House Bill 1148, introduced by Jerry Bergevin (R-District 17), would charge the state board of education to "[r]equire evolution to be taught in the public schools of this state as a theory, including the theorists' political and ideological viewpoints and their position on the concept of atheism." House Bill 1457, introduced by Gary Hopper (R-District 7) and John Burt (R-District 7), would charge the state board of education to "[r]equire science teachers to instruct pupils that proper scientific inquire [sic] results from not committing to any one theory or hypothesis, no matter how firmly it appears to be established, and that scientific and technological innovations based on new evidence can challenge accepted scientific theories or modes."

What's interesting in the first bill is the concern about the historical development of evolution. It's a common belief among Biblical literalists that learning about evolution will lead students to atheism. But as many a Christian high school teacher can attest, a little historical research shows Christians at the time of Darwin were not at all unanimous in rejecting his theory.

But the bill has more problems. Evolution, it charges, should only be taught in theoretical terms, "including the theorists' political and ideological viewpoints and their position on the concept of atheism."

Position on the concept of atheism? Which means, once again, introducing the discussion of religion (or the lack thereof in this case) into the public school science curriculum.

It seems to me that this could have consequences exactly counter to what the bill's supporters intend. For example, imagine a conservative Christian suing the state's education board for violating the Establishment clause.

Why? Because atheism is explicitly being discussed as a consequence of Darwin's theory. (No prayer in public schools, but open discussion of atheism!)

It will be interesting to see how the hearings on this bill turn out.

There's no recent news in the local papers about how Granite state voters feel about the bills. But one columnist for the Nashua Telegraph expressed his dismay back in the summer when the legislation was first discussed.

"This is the first time in years the issue of intelligent design or creationism has cropped up in New Hampshire, so far as I know," wrote David Brooks. "You may recall much debate in 1994 when the Merrimack School Board tried to place it in that town’s curriculum, but since then, the topic has largely left the academic radar."